I am of the opinion that such postures should always have definite practical foci. "Flowery" metaphors loaded with symbolic philosophical meanings were, I believe, originally mnemonics drawn from the vast repertoire of classical Chinese allusion, mnemonics so used because the students at the time would understand them instantly. In the West, however... This is one reason I especially enjoy reading Louis', Jerry's and all the others' analyses of Chinese phrases from the classics here, every little bit helps!

What you were saying reminded me of a quote that I put on the Wikipedia T'ai Chi article:

Wu Chien-ch'üan, co-founder of the Wu family style, described the name T'ai Chi Ch'üan this way at the beginning of the 20th century:"Various people have offered different explanations for the term T'ai Chi Ch'üan. Some have said: 'In terms of self-cultivation, one must train from a point of movement towards a point of quiescence. T'ai Chi comes about through the harmony of yin and yang. In terms of the art of attack and defense then, in the context of transformations of full and empty, one is constantly inwardly latent, not outwardly expressive, as if the yin and yang of T'ai Chi have not divided apart.' Others say: 'Every movement of T'ai Chi Ch'üan is based on circles, just like the shape of a T'ai Chi symbol. Therefore, it is called T'ai Chi Ch'üan.' Both explanations are quite reasonable, especially the second, which is fuller."

What is interesting to me is the description (which I believe to be a metaphor for "soft style") in which he says that it is as if yin and yang haven't divided out. The way that I learned it was that yin and yang begin to divide as soon as one starts to move in any form or application. We don't want the opponenet to be able to distinguish our full and empty, though, so such a division should be "inwardly latent, not outwardly expressive." Thereby, if an opponent were to grab us, if we have the proper kung fu they wouldn't be able to tell where our centre of gravity is through the contact point, although we should sense theirs.

There are two variations in the modern Wu style as to when the knees begin to bend. In our "square" form the wrists bend, then lift. There is a slight bend in the elbows as the wrists raise, as well as a slight bend in the ankles as the body inclines one or two degrees forward due to the weight of the arms. Once the wrists are in front of the shoulders (wrists still bent, elbows down and back open between the shoulder blades naturally), the elbows begin to sink to bring the wrists back and slightly down. The body goes back to vertical from their weight being withdrawn. Then the hands are gradually lowered down to either side of the legs, the fingertips should be held back at the end, which means in the course of their descent the wrists have gone from being bent all the way in one direction to being bent all the way in the other relative to the arms. Only then do we begin to bend the knees and tuck in the hip. In our "round" forms, the knee bend is initiated as the hands begin to descend.

There are a dozen or so martial applications to these few simple motions, implicitly and explicitly. The p'eng demonstration that I earlier described is one of many potential demonstrations.

In my opinion, none of the moves is symbolic in the sense of reflecting philosophy but not having practical application. For example, Yang Zhenduo makes this comment in his book about the preparation move: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"><B>From the point of view of martial arts technique, this move is crucial: here I use my stillness to await the opponent's movement. Although quiescent, there is still movement: I am observing the direction of the opponents move. Although I am reacting there is also the intention of movement: the posture is like drawing the bow in preparation to release. So don't skip lightly over this move.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I enjoyed your posts; all of them thought provoking. In thinking about this whole preparation/commencement section, I’m reminded of the interesting tidbit that Yang Chengfu made no mention whatsoever of the raising and lowering of the arms in his 1934 book, Taijiquan tiyong quanshu, or the earlier (1931) Taijiquan shiyongfa. He did remark on the essential postural alignments, the importance of gathering and calming the jingshen, and, like Yang Zhenduo, the use of stillness to deal with the other’s movement. Only these are discussed, with no description of raising and lowering the arms. The next sequence is Grasp Sparrow’s Tail, with no mention of a transition involving the raising/lowering. Xu Yusheng’s 1921 book, Taijiquan shi tujie, also makes no mention of the raising and lowering of the arms, but Chen Weiming’s 1925 book, Taijiquan shu, does describe the raising/lowering. For a movement so emblematic in the opening of the received form, it strikes me as odd it did not bear mention in the early books.

Louis, you stated the following, which I find to be a very important point:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> Perhaps more important than visual differences is what the palm feels like. In fact, in Yang Zhenduo’s explanation of the palm methods, he stresses that the student must monitor the “jin gan” (sensation of energy) in order to assess whether he or she has found the optimal position and shape of the palm. Since human bodies are not all the same, the appearance will vary from one person to another.</font>

On the surface, it seems to me that the Yangs are very concerned about external details, such as hand positions. As I have studied longer, it seems to me that their form is really built around particular sensations that one should experience and understand. This is basically how I now understand the Ten Essentials.

Once one clearly understands the correct sensations and their purposes, the externals seem to fall away. All of the external descriptions of the Ten Essentials and similar principles seem to have exceptions, but the sensations that underlie them do not seem to have any. For example, “Empty, lively, pushing up the top of the head, and energetic” (“xu ling ding jin”) is often interpreted as requiring an erect head position without any appreciable lean; however, in Needle at Sea Bottom, Punch Downward (Zai1 chui2), and Nezha Explores the Sea Bottom (from the Sword Form), we have three different types of lean, all seemingly calibrated to make sure that the torso energy remains somewhat behind the striking energy going through the arm.

Jamie, you posted the following:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> I have observed that the concavity of the palm may change based on what the movement is.</font>

I think this is also a very good point and is an example of externals varying, but internals not. I do not think the Yangs have much use for fixed hand shapes, but simply want the practitioner to experience a particular feeling of Jin. This Jin seems to be refined and used in one way to do High Pat on Horse with Thrusting Palm, in another way for White Snake Spits out Tongue, and yet another way in Fist Under Elbow or Cloud Hands. In Push, one may need to use the palms to cup the opponent’s ribs. In Fan through the Back, one may need to use the left palm to fit into the opponent’s armpit. In the Single Whip transition and in Needle at Sea Bottom, the right hand takes on yet another configuration, with two different applications, that is not separately described or named, as far as I am aware. Because of all this variation, I think it can be misleading to focus too much on the hand shape per se, without linking it to the desired sensation.

I think that hand usage can also vary according to the response one wants from the opponent. In some cases, one wants to slip one’s hand free and so will try to minimize its three-dimensional profile. In other cases, one may want to hook the opponent’s grip on one’s wrist and so try to tense in a way that will lead the opponent to strengthen and stiffen her grip.

In Apparent Closure and in Fair Lady Works the Shuttle, it is unclear to me whether I should prefer to have the opponent release my wrist or have her try to maintain a death grip. The applications seem to work either way, although with different details. My current guess is that one wants to maintain a neutral stance that neither makes it easy for her to release nor easy for her to hold on. In that way, she must fully commit and reveal her intent.

Is this similar to seeking the linear and circular trajectories in Taiji practice?

Or is this more about distinguishing softness and hardness in Taiji practice?</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think that much of the question of hardness and softness originates from the Dao De Jing (Tao Te Ching) http://www.edepot.com/tao4.html. In it, there are passages like the following:

“Nothing in the worldis as soft and yielding as water.Yet for dissolving the hard and inflexible,nothing can surpass it.”

I think the idea is that if you can be soft enough, you can over come what is hard. This is because extreme softness gives rise to extreme hardness. “Softness” in this case does not mean “mushiness,” but something that is infinitely flexible, resilient, and capable of concentration. Water under pressure becomes extremely hard. Soft steel can be sharpened to a much “harder” point than more rigid and brittle iron.

“Men are born soft and supple;dead, they are stiff and hard.Pla[n]ts are born tender and pliant;dead, they are brittle and dry.

“Thus whoever is stiff and inflexibleis a disciple of death.Whoever is soft and yieldingis a disciple of life.

“The hard and stiff will be broken.The soft and supple will prevail.”

Another reason to be soft is that it allows the hardness to come from the opponent. You are soft on the outside “to invite the thief into the house” and hard on the inside to crush him once he is “trapped inside.” If you are hard on the outside, then the thief will await a better opportunity and not declare himself. Once he finds a chink in the hard outside, he will have access to the soft inside where you are weak.

Using hard styles, you might perform a move like Roll Back with speed and power to use bone-on-bone force to break the opponent’s arm at the elbow. Using soft styles, you use “soft,” “rounded” techniques like Sticking, Adhering, and Holding (“Na”) to bring the opponent into a position where he is forced to concentrate your softness into hardness. You break the arm with the soft fleshy part of your forearm that allows you to concentrate your body energy (Jin) behind it. You want the Jin to flow freely through your body and not use localized force or Qi that will prevent you from concentrating your whole-body power at one point.

Polaris, you mentioned the following in your post:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> In our "square" form the wrists bend, then lift. There is a slight bend in the elbows as the wrists raise, as well as a slight bend in the ankles as the body inclines one or two degrees forward due to the weight of the arms. Once the wrists are in front of the shoulders (wrists still bent, elbows down and back open between the shoulder blades naturally), the elbows begin to sink to bring the wrists back and slightly down. The body goes back to vertical from their weight being withdrawn.</font>

I find this body usage quite interesting. I have heard varying things about what to do in Yang Style, but have never taken the opportunity to ask the Yangs if one should focus on any particular weight shifts during the Commencement Posture. Most consistently, I have heard fellow practitioners assert that the body should move backward as the arms rise in order to counterbalance them and maintain central equilibrium. This is, of course, the exact opposite of what you have described.

As I have considered this issue, I recall many, many instances in the Hand Form, where one or both arms are used partly to counterbalance the weight of the legs; however, I cannot recall anywhere where the weight of the torso is clearly moved away from a hand technique. The closest instance of this is in Bend the Bow and Shoot the Tiger, where the body energy seems to move at right angles to the strike. Because of this logic, I have been reluctant to credit this idea of moving the body away from the arms in the Commencement Posture. I am quite interested in seeing that the Wu Square Form also seems to come to an opposite conclusion.

You also mentioned the following:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> In our "round" forms, the knee bend is initiated as the hands begin to descend.</font>

This is an interesting detail in contrast to what I had speculated about Yang Zhenji’s form. In this case, it appears that the energy of the sinking body is used to lead the sinking energy in the arms. If this is so, why would the square form save this body energy for the end of the posture? What is the segmentation meant to emphasize in this instance, preparation for a following technique?

Jerry, thanks for the quote from Yang Zhenduo’s book. I had always wondered about how best to manifest “Stillness in Movement” during the Preparation Posture. You also mentioned the following:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> In my opinion, none of the moves is symbolic in the sense of reflecting philosophy but not having practical application.</font>

Are talking only about the Hand Form, or also about the weapons forms? Do you have any ideas about the beginning of the Sword Form? As I have just been given to understand it, this posture was altered by Yang Chengfu to be more like the hand form; however, it seems impractical to me to have a double-edged weapon held in the crook of one’s elbow for a martial purpose. It also seems that the initial change of position of the sword does not have a directly useful martial purpose.

As I consider this issue, it does seem to me that beginning with the sword in front of the arm is a safer starting position with respect to fellow students in the room. One seems less likely to lose focus on where the tip of the weapon is pointing and where it can reach. Fatigue is also not an issue until the form is actually begun and the spirit is sufficiently raised and engaged to help guard against casual clumsiness. This position also calls attention to the different left-hand usage of the saber, which always seems to be cradled in front of the elbow.

Louis, thanks for your latest post on the inconsistent treatment of raising hands in the early literature on Yang Chengfu’s practice. This makes me again wonder about possible “symbolic” origins for the Commencement Posture. If this posture was meant to set the martial tone of the form, why leave it out? If it is a later “adornment,” such omission seems understandable.

Even the name Commencement Posture is beginning to sound suspicious to me. Again, why call the second posture of the form the Commencement Posture? With such an emphasis in the art on differentiating full and empty, why begin the techniques with a horse stance?

Does traditional Chen Style begin its form with raising the hands? This is how I briefly learned it, but I wonder if the form I was being taught was not influenced by Yang Style practices.

It just sounds more and more to me that a more interesting beginning to the form was devised or reincorporated into the form and that this posture was then used to emphasize subtle principles and further refine the form. I must admit that I do prefer the beginnings of the Hand and Sword Forms to the no-nonsense beginning of the Saber Form. Raising my arms allows me to further deepen my body connectedness and begun “strumming the Qi” a little before having to step out.

A propos Gu Rou Chen's observation, I spent some time in Wuhan over ten years ago where I witnessed dozens of people lined up in parks along the river every morning repeatedly making the same "commencement" motion in time with their breathing, apparently as a form of qigong. I was told that the best time to do it was in the early morning, esp. as the disc of the Sun was crossing the horizon line. Coincidentally, I have been taught a different standing meditation and breathing pattern to do in the morning by my seniors, said to be best done as the Sun crosses the horizon line.

Quoth Audi:

"I find this body usage quite interesting. I have heard varying things about what to do in Yang Style, but have never taken the opportunity to ask the Yangs if one should focus on any particular weight shifts during the Commencement Posture. Most consistently, I have heard fellow practitioners assert that the body should move backward as the arms rise in order to counterbalance them and maintain central equilibrium. This is, of course, the exact opposite of what you have described.

This is an interesting detail in contrast to what I had speculated about Yang Zhenji’s form. In this case, it appears that the energy of the sinking body is used to lead the sinking energy in the arms. If this is so, why would the square form save this body energy for the end of the posture? What is the segmentation meant to emphasize in this instance, preparation for a following technique?"

The sinking of the body doesn't lead the downward motion of the hands (although it does look that way), rather they are executed precisely simultaneously, both descending together in a direct one to one gearing ratio considered as "one thought" in our round form.

The segmentation of the square form is more for teaching focus on individual movements through the joints. As it says in Wilhelm's commentary on the I Ching, "One must be able to both separate and unite." The potential "ts'ai" (cai) or "an" applications of the downward motion of the arms are still possible even if the body itself doesn't sink. The "sectional teaching method" was a principle of my Sifu's grandfather Wu Kung-i (Gongyi), who was a formal student of Yang Shao-hou when he was a young man, and the square form is his baby. He had a lot of input (and final approval) from Yang Shao-hou and his own father, Wu Chien-ch'uan, but he was the one who completed the work on the "square" concept, ultimately. Still, we see it as only half the picture, as the round concept form is believed to be equally necessary. The two forms have distinctly different leverages for the same postures.

Which gets me back to the lean forward in the modern Wu family's commencement posture. It is done to easily coordinate the entire body's weight behind the p'eng (or an, if it is to be a wrist strike) application which is implied in the motion. Also, it stretches out the hamstrings very nicely!

I would like to say in accord with Jerry's posting that I never believed for a second that YZD's or Yang Jun's school emphasised anything but concrete physical applications for their form movements and the teaching metaphors used to represent them. My comments were more in response to the plethora of non-lineage schools that have mostly forgotten the applications the forms were designed to train us for.

Xie Bingcan (and probably Fu Zhongwen) shows the opening of the sword form in a simpler way than the Yangs do, just flipping the sword over in a tight circle without having the tip go forward toward one's center line. In either case I see some definite applications. The simpler version involves a block or possibly even hooking and removing the opponents weapon from his hand.

Also, when you raise the sword in your left hand it it possible to strike the opponents body with the butt of the sword. Depending on what is hit, that could be a quite a serious blow, because all your force is concentrated in the tiny surface area of the inner point of the handle.

Audi, your analyzing is very worth to be sharing. Speaking metaphorically Preparation/Commencement Posture is the door to taolu that represents/establishes style features. If we only could open it…You mentioned silk reeling energy/jin but do Yangs mention it? Sorry for this a little provoking question. I believe that silk reeling is one of the keys. The other key that by some reason nobody mentioned is what happens in legs before hands raising. I think we should still remember that jin/movement originates in legs.

Why YZD doesn’t bend the knees until after the weight begins to shift into the right leg? Partly because he terns to the right almost in middle/center position (He first terns only then do any other movements. If he bends his knee before this kind of turning then it would be harder to do just this kind of rotating.

Audi, thank you for advising about "needle and cotton" stuff but I still believe that this image is not merely about soft and hard aspect – I view it as advise about feeling and expressing of jin along the bones.

Chen style has almost the same commencement form. Master Chen Zhenglei clearly describes the movement of jin/nergy of commencement form in his book about lao jia (old frame). As far as I remember energy first moves downward along the legs to the soles (body slightly lowers) then it rises upward along the legs then along the back, divides in two currents in area between shoulders. One current moves into hands and they starts to rise. Other current continues to move along Du/Ren channels. Needless to say that all movement in Chen style is accomplished with chan si jin (silk reeling jin).

>>>If the opponent persists in trying to control my wrists, he is at a disadvantage in resisting my rotation and will naturally tense his forearm and elbow muscles. If I sense this, I can then use his reactions to “attack” the center of his upper back through his own arms. Again, if his mind is focused on controlling my arms, it is unnatural for him to have his upper back correctly deployed to counter my technique. If I execute correctly, the opponent’s Jin will break between his shoulder blades. As my force concentrates there, he will naturally attempt to push back, but will instead end up pushing himself away from my wrists and my body. Since he is initiating the push himself, it will be unnatural for him to maintain his grip. He will sail away from me under the power of our combined Jin."

So would you focus your Yi actually into that area - i.e. between his shoulder blades - or would you project through it and out the back, if that makes any sense?

Yuri,I have done my utmost not to get into the fray here. I have opinions about lifting the arms, body movement (to lean or not to lean, that is the question. whether 'tis nobler to suffer the lean of the Wu's or stay upright and centered like the Yangs... oh, sorry, sometimes I have these funny little fits, but I digress), lowering the arms, hand placement during, timing of sinking, all that....But they're just my opinions and can be refuted, rightfully and often, by others if they wish. To each their own, I always say, or try to. I practice Master Yang Jun's way when I do his forms. I practice Si Kung Wu Tai Sin's way when I do his forms. I practice Sifu Eddie's way when I do his forms. I practice my way when I'm alone.This is as it should be, in my personal, humble opinion. For all the reasons stated by others above, and more, all these discussions are valid and applicable and everyone will have to decide on their own which way is best in the long run.But...In your posting you say:"Why YZD doesn’t bend the knees until after the weight begins to shift into the right leg? Partly because he terns to the right almost in middle/center position (He first terns only then do any other movements. If he bends his knee before this kind of turning then it would be harder to do just this kind of rotating."I have to disagree that it is any harder or easier to turn after that.I do this both ways, siking first, sinking as I step. I have done this both ways mostly because I do quite a few different forms and sometimes I mess up and run one into another, being human and all, and forget exactly which timing I'm going for.From practical, first hand experience, and from having just tried again to be certain of what I say...It makes absolutely no difference to the ease of shifting weight to left, stepping, rotationally turning, turning from the hip, from the waist, any of the principals of TCC that I know of or can find if you stay standing up naturally straight through your knees or sink into your knees for this turn.None at all.It works just as easily either way, at least it does for me. The only thing I find different is my intent for each move. Just had to say that, and now I'll bow out and let the discussion rage on unless anyone cares to comment further.

First I will add my support to those who say that there is nothing in the individual forms that does have "meaning" martially.

First a question.

Does Yang Jun still teach in the "commencement form" that when you lower the arms that you first take out the remaing tension/uplift of the shoulders, folowed by a small bending of the elbows, followed by a sinking of the wrists, with the fingers following behind?

I can see uses of the sinking by YZJ and in what YZD does. Both appropraite, both "correct" with the intent.

On the arms lifting. If an opponent has you by the neck or shirt, the rising arms--or "end of the arms" makes perfect contact with a nerve running on the back of the opponets arm. Striking this numbs them. I leanred this in a Hopkido seminar years and years ago. Makes perfect sense for the opening movement. Lowering the arms if the one fails seeks to break that same hold. YZJs sinking make sense in this regard. I know this is old hat, but just to make the point. From then on Audis technique is the one I learned.

I will have to get back later with other comments on the very interesting info offered by so many. Very nice.

On last note on sinking when moving the right foot. It may be that age is a factor with older practioners. Yang Jun has made comments on this himself. I definately think that this is a factor in that is less hard on old joints to "retreat"(shift the wieght back) before continuing. Now it is true that this has applications. But it might also be that older gentlemen might be more inclined to show one way of doing things as they are most comfortable with that---and---they may just have a personal preference.

On "going back" before a movement...I have to say I used to think this was totally unecessary, harmless but not needed was how I looked at it.Now, I'm not so sure.If nothing else, think of what your body does when it makes contact, especially forceful contact, with another body...That's right, it goes back some to accomodate the impact. So if you "give back" to the left before you go right, then you're practicing a real movement your body is likely to make when making contact with another body.Especially if that other body is coming at you with force. You will, naturally, "give back" to that incoming force. So if you practice this give back of energy, then you will do it naturally and easily when the time comes.Just makes sense, to me. Will that always happen? No. Not if you're not meeting incoming force directly (never a good idea, but we can't always decide that, especially if caught at unawares), or even a good amount of force indirectly, then you won't have this "give back". If, say, you're only indirectly meeting a badly thrown punch, or if you're sensitivity is such that a good whallop will not up-root you even slightly (which would be, I would think, Master level kind of stuff) then there will be no "give back" and you can step directly and proceed with your response.That's why I practice both ways. Either way, I'm ready.In fact, if you think about the Yang style forms of Master Yang Jun, then you'll realize that this is how the form goes. Sometimes you give that weight back, sometimes you don't.It depends on what your intent is for the form. And I think the Yangs have spread it out quite nicely in thier current form.Just my opinion.

Wushuer, I agree with you that "all these discussions are valid and applicable and everyone will have to decide on their own which way is best in the long run". I by myself passed through numerous influences from different sub-styles on my first style (I've been practicing 37 form of Yang style – not CMC. One Chinese taught it here many years ago. He called it Taiji Kai Men). I only wanted to remember that "[movement or jin] is originated/rooted in foots, issued by the legs, governed by the waist, and [only] expressed in the [hands and] fingers" according Classics. In one style it's obvious in other it's hidden deeply. If teacher/master doesn't teach this describing commencement form then it's true that nobody reveals everything even for money. These are reasons why I (and you?) observe different styles.

Yuri,Yes, there are reasons why I practice different forms. I have waxed poetic about them on this forum in the past, so I will not go into them again here.The classics do say these things. I have never seen them hidden in forms, to those with eyes that see they are always obvious. If you are looking only for the energies and seeing past the distractions of the external forms, then these things cannot be hidden.

Modern Masters, at least in the U.S., will only teach you all you need to know for money. What else could they take? They tend, however, to teach the deepest things to those who follow them the longest and give them the most respect, as long as that respect is now wrapped tightly with dollar bills.As it should be. In this day and age your "services" are not required, rather your checkbook.But for money, still in this day and age, you can get all the training you will ever need.At least in the U.S.A., money is all they will take!You try to get a TCC Master in the U.S.A. to train you by kneeling at his feet and offering your services in return for training and see how far that gets you!So....Nowadays, you need to bring cash when you go to meet a Master for his training. This is not a disparagement! It is reality. I am not knocking it, it's the new way of life and I accept it totally with no complaint. There is an undercurrent of some of the "old school" folks that find this to be detrimental to the art and wax on and on about how it shouldn't be about money. What else can it be about?Not too many of us have the wherewithal to stop working and become someone's personal servant in exchange for our training. So in todays world, we pay money. It's the way of things now and it's the only viable way I know of.